If Mary was the mother of God...

[moondweller]

God was born insofar has His incarnation was Born, but the Son is eternal

Thank you. The MAN Christ Jesus came into existence with the incarnation, but the Son is eternal: "Luke 1:31 “And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus.” Mary’s motherhood had only to do with the humanity of Christ, not His deity. By jove, I think you’ve got it.

 

[placido]

I am not. Not in the least. I am disputing the notion the Mary can be the mother of God. She was the God-bearer (theotokos), but that does not make her the “mother of God.” She had nothing to do with His deity, then and now. God (the Son) has no mother. Nor does God the Father. Nor does God the Holy Spirit have a spouse.

1. Mary conceives and gives birth to a son.
2. Mary’s son is Jesus Christ.
3. Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ.
4. Jesus Christ is God the Son.
5. Jesus Christ’s mother is Mary.
6. Mary is Mother of God the Son …
   I don’t know, but there must be some strange reasons why you fail to see clearly here.

placido

 

[placido]

Thank you. The MAN Christ Jesus came into existence with the incarnation, but the Son is eternal:

You are speeding into a dangerous heresy of separating Christ.

placido

 

[Dokimas]

You are speeding into a dangerous heresy of separating Christ.

placido

Phil 2:
1 ¶ If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies,
2 Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.
3 Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.
4 Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.
5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7 **But made himself of ****no reputation **(Greek word meaning ‘emptied’), and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

What do these verses mean?

 

[placido]

Phil 2:
1 ¶ If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies,
2 Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.
3 Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.
4 Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.
5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7 **But made himself of ****no reputation **(Greek word meaning ‘emptied’), and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

What do these verses mean?

While waiting for my answer read this: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (…) and the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as of the Father’s only Son, full of grace and truth.” (John 1:1, 14)
Did Christ (the Word) cease to be God while in Mary’s womb? If so, then when did He revert back to being God again?

placido

 

[iluvburpees]

“And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Luke 1:43

Thank you, St. Elizabeth, for making it so clear to us.

Seriously, what can a protestant say against this one?

 

[UnityofTrinity]

Biedrik, 1 + 1 only = 2 when they are separate entities.

But here, 1 + 1 is NOT = 2 because the order is not sequential and one “1” is in the other “1”.

To say that Jesus is in the Father God, and the Father in Him, and then say that the son came about through the mother with the help of the Father is totally wrong because before Mary was, Jesus was (since Jesus Himself said He was even before Abraham). Mary therefore is something that only existed BECAUSE of Jesus. Not the other way around. Note the order here.

Remember, the Bible clears says that nothing in this world is made without Him. So, Jesus came about NOT because of Mary but Mary came about because of Jesus! What role then does Mary have in the conception of Jesus? Nothing more than just a ‘bearer’ or ‘point’ of emergence.

Therefore to call Mary, the mother of God is in-accurate and not right.

.

This is what the Church teaches: It doesn’t teach that Mary born God, it doesn’t say that because of Mary, there is God, by stating so you just prove that you know little about what the Church really teach. The Church teaches us that not by Mary that comes God, but it was by God comes Mary. But God Himself because of His love for humanity put Himself down, truly: “Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many”.

If did not bear a child, yet raise Him as though as He is her own son, does that make her less than a mother? Surely not, for anybody say anything different would be called ignorant. Likewise, Mary did not create God, “Mother of God” does not give Her the ability to do so, but what is it? “Mother of God” in my opinion simply state the relationship between Her and Her Son, Jesus, who is God.

Even despite the fact that Jesus was before Mary, and Jesus was God does not deny the fact that He himself deny His human nature, just as any human, He ate, He drank, He worshiped God, so therefore just as any human He has a mother. And do you notice anything else?

What role Mary play? How about the role of carrying a that Child for 9 months despite the risk of being persecuted by the Jewish authority? How about abandon everything and everyone she knew to escape to Egypt with Joseph because of this child? What about the pain of childbirth, and the pain during raising your child? What about all those years of raising Jesus, and most of all what about her pain, the agony of seeing her only Son hung upon the Cross, crucified, imagine us being distanced to Him yet still feel upset for His pain, how do you think Mary felt like when she see it? So does that make her role more than a bearer now? Absolutely.

 

[Dokimas]

While waiting for my answer read this: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (…) and the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as of the Father’s only Son, full of grace and truth.” (John 1:1, 14)
Did Christ (the Word) cease to be God while in Mary’s womb? If so, then when did He revert back to being God again?

placido

The problem we have is trying to understand the Eternal, Omnipotent, Omnicient, Omnipresent God with a finite mind. Impossible!!! It would be easier to fit all the oceans in a thimble than for us to understand God.

 

[iluvburpees]

What about the pain of childbirth…

But as the Conception itself transcends the order of nature, so the birth of our Lord presents to our contemplation nothing but what is divine.
Besides, what is admirable beyond the power of thoughts or words to express, He is born of His Mother without any diminution of her maternal virginity, just as He afterwards went forth from the sepulchre while it was closed and sealed, and entered the room in which His disciples were assembled, the doors being shut; or not to depart from every-day examples, just as the rays of the sun penetrate without breaking or injuring in the least the solid substance of glass, so after a like but more exalted manner did Jesus Christ come forth from His mother’s womb without injury to her maternal virginity. … To Eve it was said: In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children. Mary was exempt from this law, for preserving her virginal integrity inviolate she brought forth Jesus the Son of God without experiencing, as we have already said, any sense of pain.
CATECHISM OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
PART 1: THE CREED
Article III

On the contrary, Augustine says (Sermone de Nativitate supposititious), addressing himself to the Virgin-Mother: “In conceiving thou wast all pure, in giving birth thou wast without pain.”
I answer that, The pains of childbirth are caused by the infant opening the passage from the womb. Now it has been said above (Q28,A2, Replies to Objections), that Christ came forth from the closed womb of His Mother, and, consequently, without opening the passage. Consequently there was no pain in that birth, as neither was there any corruption; on the contrary, there was much joy therein for that God-Man “was born into the world,” according to Isaiah 35:1,2: “Like the lily, it shall bud forth and blossom, and shall rejoice with joy and praise.”
SUMMA THEOLOGICA
Q35,A6

 

[iluvburpees]

The problem we have is trying to understand the Eternal, Omnipotent, Omnicient, Omnipresent God with a finite mind. Impossible!!! It would be easier to fit all the oceans in a thimble than for us to understand God.

Which is exactly why we don’t attempt to understand the “how” or the “why” of Mary’s motherhood, but simply accept the “what” by accepting the what the Bible says, not to mention Tradition. But we don’t even need Tradition; the Bible alone is sufficient to prove it.

 

[Dokimas]

Which is exactly why we don’t attempt to understand the “how” or the “why” of Mary’s motherhood, but simply accept the “what” by accepting the what the Bible says, not to mention Tradition. But we don’t even need Tradition; the Bible alone is sufficient to prove it.

How about the ‘whether’? We are to take care that what we believe is true.

 

[jlhargus]

JL: So you admit Israel was not a virgin at Christ’s birth, you have blown your whole theory. Christ was BORN OF A VIRGIN. Do you EVER really read scripture?

JL: Let’s start with the original context beginning with So following;

MD: It doesn’t say the woman was a virgin. The reason being is the woman is not Mary but national Israel. The sign is a prophecy concerning that nation - not Mary. The “woman” described in the “sign” is NEVER seen in heaven. Her child is caught up to the throne of God, but she is NOT. The events connected with her all happen on earth. The “sign” is not at all about Mary. It alludes to her, being the Jewish virgin who conceived and gave birth. But the “woman” (not described as a virgin) in the “sign” is national Israel. As Jesus said, “…salvation is from the Jews.” Jesus Himself being a Jew, born in that nation.

JL: So you admit Israel was not a virgin at Christ’s birth, you have blown your whole theory. Christ was BORN OF A VIRGIN. Do you EVER really read scripture? [Rv12:1 And **THERE APPEARD a great wonder IN HEAVEN; A WOMAN clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: 2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. 3 And there appeared ANOTHER WONDER IN HEAVEN; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.]

MD: Nations aren’t (literally) “virgins.” Do you ever really read my posts? Here’s my answer again:

JL: Neither can they be LITERAL mothers. Who said they were literally virgins? again your words not mine. Yet they are so called figuratively.

Jer31:21 Set thee up waymarks, make thee high heaps: set thine heart toward the highway, even the way which thou wentest: turn again, O VIRGIN OF ISRAEL, turn again to these thy cities.

Jer3:6 The LORD said also unto me in the days of Josiah the king, Hast thou seen that which BACKSLIDING ISRAEL hath done? she is gone up upon every high mountain and under every green tree, and there hath PLAYED THE HARLOT.

MD: Here’s my answer again:

It (the sign) doesn’t say the woman was a virgin. The reason being is the woman is not Mary but national Israel. The sign is a prophecy concerning that nation - not Mary. The “woman” described in the “sign” is NEVER seen in heaven. Her child is caught up to the throne of God, but she is NOT. The events connected with her all happen on earth. The “sign” is not at all about Mary. It alludes to her, being the Jewish virgin who conceived and gave birth. But the “woman” (not described as a virgin) in the “sign” is national Israel. As Jesus said, “…salvation is from the Jews.” Jesus Himself being a Jew, born in that nation.

JL: If the SIGN, which is THE WOMAN IN HEAVEN who gives birth to a man child, who is taken into heaven, and that man child IS literally CHRIST, then the LITERAL WOMAN must be a VIRGIN and Mary the Mother of God. Else she IS NOT Christ’s literal mother.

Israel has a symbolic meaning, as mother, only in the sense that Christ was born there. But Israel is not the literal meaning of the SIGN (the WOMAN). Yes salvation is from the Jews, “JUDIANS”, because Christ is of the tribe of JUDA. From which David came.

If the SIGN, as you post, “The “woman” described in the “SIGN” is NEVER seen IN HEAVEN “ But the “woman” (not described as a virgin) in the “sign” is national Israel.”] Is NEVER seen in heaven, isn’t that a contradiction of the scripture?

[Rv12:1 And **THERE APPEARD a great (SIGN) wonder IN HEAVEN; A WOMAN clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: 2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. 3 And there appeared ANOTHER WONDER IN HEAVEN; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. 4 His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that he might devour her child the moment it was born. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all the nations with an iron scepter. And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. 6 THE WOMAN (Church) fled into the desert to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days.]

The 1,260 days refer to the symbolic meaning of THE WOMAN, AS THE CHURCH in the time of Anti-Christ, or if you prefer Israel, but not natural Israel, which was a harlot at that time, but the new regenerated spiritual Israel, which is the Church.

JL: As you say, It doesn’t change anything. The child is both person and symbol, The woman is both person and symbol, the dragon is both person and symbol. The 1,260 days refer to the symbolic meaning of the woman, as the Church, in the time of Anti-Christ, the new regenerated spiritual Israel, which is the Church.
MD: Yes, the sign is symbolic, as many prophecies are. But NONE of this prophecy refers directly to Mary.

JL: The literal meaning is Mary the symbolic meaning is the Church, spiritual Israel. Are the child and dragon literal persons or symbols only? I they are both literal persons then the woman must also be a literal person, otherwise you are flip floping in mid stream.

 

[jlhargus]

MD: At the end of the age there will be a believing remnant of Jews which are ushered into Christ’s earthly, Millennial Kingdom which He sets up on earth at His second advent. They make up what Paul states as, “all Israel” that is “saved” in Rom. 11:25-29. Christ at that time establishes the N.C. with national Israel (read Jer. 31:31-40; cf. Is. 54:1-8; Eze. 16:60-63).

JL: Then I suggest you present you evidence, I don’t go on wild goose chases reading endless book verses.

MD: None of this has to do with the church which Christ is presently building during this age. She will be taken up to be with her Lord prior to these events. She will return with Him at the end of the age. The church is not Israel and Israel is not the church - according to a literal rendering of the Scriptures.

JL: I see no evidence.

[Rms11:15 For **if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall THE RECEIVING OF THEM BE, but life from the dead? 16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and IF THE ROOT BE HOLY, SO ARE THE BRANCHES. 17 And if some of the branches be broken off, AND THOU BEING A WILD OLIVE TREE, WERT GRAFTED IN among them, and with them PARTAKEST OF THE ROOT and fatness OF THE OLIVE TREE; 18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, THOUS BEAREST NOT THE ROOT, but the root thee. 19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. 20 Well; BECAUSE OF UNBELIEF THEY WERE BROKEN OFF, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 21 For IF GOD SPARED NOT THE NATURAL BRANCES, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. 23 And they also, IF THEY ABIDE NOT STILL IN UNBELIEF, SHALL BE GRAFTED IN: for GOD IS ABLE TO GRAFT THEM IN AGAIN. 24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, AND WERT GRAFTED contrary to nature INTO A GOOD OLIVE TREE.: HOW MUCH MORE SHALL THESE, which be THE NATURAL BRANCES, BE GRAFTED INTO THEIR OWN OLIVE TREE? 25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. 26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: 27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. 28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father’s sakes. 29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. 30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: 31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.]

There is only ONE olive tree whose roots are holy and we have been grafted into that ONE OLIVE TREE. When God converts all Israel, they will be grafted back into that ONE OLIVE TREE, with the ONE people of God.

[Eph2:11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; 12 **That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens FROM the commonwealth of ISRAEL, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: 13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain (two) one new man, so making peace; 16 And that he might reconcile BOTH unto God IN ONE BODY by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18 For through him we BOTH have access by one Spirit unto the Father. 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: 22 In whom ye also are BUILDE TOGETHER together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.] I see NO evidence there are two people of God. When God converts all Israel they will be baptized into the ONE BODY OF CHRIST the Church.

Gal3:26 For YE ARE ALL CHILDREN OF GOD BY FAITH IN CHRIST JESUS. 27 For AS MANY OF YOU AS HAVE BEEN BAPTIZED INTO CHRIST have put on Christ. 28 THERE IS NEITHER JEW NOR GREEK, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for YE ARE ALL ONE IN CHRIST JESUS. 29 And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye ABRAHAM’S SEED, and heirs according to the promise.

 

[iluvburpees]

How about the ‘whether’? We are to take care that what we believe is true.

The “whether” is right in your bible.

“And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Luke 1:43

"Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen.

"When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son.

John 19:25-26

Seems like the “whether” has been solved. All that’s left is for us to not deny the Word of God.

 

[Dokimas]

The “whether” is right in your bible.

“And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Luke 1:43

"Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen.

"When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son.

John 19:25-26

Seems like the “whether” has been solved. All that’s left is for us to not deny the Word of God.

I thought the discussion was about mothering God and being the Ark. If I’d none it was just about giving birth to the Lord I may not have made any comments.

 

[jlhargus]

It says that Mary was the mother of Jesus because Jesus did not exist before Mary. What the Bible does not say is that Mary was the mother of God because… (you fill in the blank).

JL: Jn8:58 JESUS SAID unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, BEFORE ABRAHAM WAS, I AM.

Jn1.1 the Word was with God the Word WAS God, Jn1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us. If God became flesh then Mary is mother of God made flesh.

2Jn1:7 For many DECEIVERS are entered into the world, who CONFESS NOT THAT JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH. THIS IS is a deceiver and AN ANTICHRIST.

 

[jlhargus]

It was ONLY the Blood of Jesus that paid for our sins, not preachers, not Paul, not Mary.

There’s only One Savior, thus only One that saves. The best we can do, is bring the lost to the Savior.

JL: Yes and that is what makes us instruments and sharers in Christ’s one mediatorship, of that salvation.

1Tm4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt BOTH SAVE THYSELF, AND THEM that hear thee.

Jms5:20 Let him know, that HE WHICH CONVERTHETH THE SINNER from the error of his way SHALL SAVE A SOUL FROM DEATH, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

 

[placido]

The problem we have is trying to understand the Eternal, Omnipotent, Omnicient, Omnipresent God with a finite mind. Impossible!!! It would be easier to fit all the oceans in a thimble than for us to understand God.

That is not the problem – at least not in this case. All we have to do here is to read the Bible and accept what it tells us. And what it tells us is that the Eternal, Omnipotent, Omnicient, Omnipresent God willed to be born of a virgin. The virgin is therefore His mother.
[Note that Mary is not mother of God the Father; she is not mother of God the Holy Spirit; she is mother of God the Son.]

placido

 

[placido]

How about the ‘whether’? We are to take care that what we believe is true.

There is no question of whether what we believe is true or not because the Bible is clear both in prophesying what would happen and in reporting what indeed happened:
Prophesy – a virgin would give birth to a son who is God (Isaiah 7:14, 9:6);
Facts – Virgin Mary gave birth to Jesus Christ who is God; she is Mother of the Lord (Luke 1:27, 43) … don’t forget that Elizabeth spoke while filled with the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit would not call a mere human baby “My Lord”.

placido

 

[placido]

I thought the discussion was about mothering God and being the Ark.

No, the Ark is a different topic. This one is about whether Mary is Mother of God or not.

If I’d none it was just about giving birth to the Lord I may not have made any comments.

Giving birth is being mother. The Bible says clearly Mary gave birth to Jesus; the Bible refers to Mary as Jesus’ mother.
Now, if Jesus is God and Mary is His mother, then Mary is Mother of God - just like that. What remains is to accept what the Bible says. We Catholics already do.

placido